1 / 26

Nucleosynthesis in classical nova explosions and Type I X-ray bursts

The unreasonable effectiveness of experiments in constraining nova nucleosynthesis. Nucleosynthesis in classical nova explosions and Type I X-ray bursts. Anuj Parikh Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Institut d'Estudis Espacials de Catalunya Barcelona, Spain. Anuj Parikh

jbowers
Download Presentation

Nucleosynthesis in classical nova explosions and Type I X-ray bursts

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The unreasonableeffectiveness of experiments in constraining nova nucleosynthesis Nucleosynthesis in classical nova explosions and Type I X-ray bursts Anuj Parikh Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Institut d'Estudis Espacials de Catalunya Barcelona, Spain Anuj Parikh Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Institut d'Estudis Espacials de Catalunya

  2. The unreasonable effectiveness of experiments in constraining nova nucleosynthesis Nucleosynthesis in classical nova explosions and Type I X-ray bursts Anuj Parikh Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Institut d'Estudis Espacials de Catalunya Barcelona, Spain

  3. The unreasonable effectiveness of experiments in constraining nova nucleosynthesis duetothehardwork of manypeople Nucleosynthesis in classical nova explosions and Type I X-ray bursts Anuj Parikh Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Institut d'Estudis Espacials de Catalunya Barcelona, Spain

  4. WIGNER VS A NOVA

  5. WIGNER VS A NOVA

  6. Classical nova explosions REVIEWS:"Classical Novae", eds: Bode, Evans (2008) José and Hernanz (2007) ... Sirius A MS star SOME HISTORY For ≈ 2000 y, stellae novae = nova + supernova 1885: Observation of a stella nova in the spiral nebula M31 (S Andromedae, Hartwig) 1920: The "Great Debate"...distance of the spiral nebulae (Curtis, Shapley) 1920s: a ≈dozen other stellae novae discovered in M31, all far fainter than that of 1885 1920s: Hubble's distance scale...spiral nebulae are galaxies! 1934: two classes of stella nova, "super-nova" for the most luminous ones (Zwicky, Baade, Lundmark) Andromeda Galaxy (M31) d = 2.5 Mly GEE / ultraviolet

  7. OBSERVATIONS Nova Her 1934 (optical), d ~ 500 ly May 1934 March 1934 2003 0.1 ly WIRO RS Oph, 2006 d = 5 kly AAVSO Vanlandingham et al. (1997) Nova V693 CrA 1981 68 d

  8. OBSERVATIONS NOVA CYGNI 1992 7.5 months history ≈ 30 000 AU Nova Cygni 1992 (d ~ 10 000 ly) ESA / IUE HST (1994)

  9. MECHANISM: Unstable thermonuclear burning of accreted matter on the surface of a white dwarf star 1.15 Msol ONe WD Macc = 1.6 x 10-10 Msol / yr José (PhD, 1996) RWD = 4330 km ΔR ≈ 300 km ΔR ≈ 200 km • close binary systems (1 − 12 h) • accretion for ≈ 105 years* • envelope is degenerate • from few x 107 K to Tpeak ≈ 10 − 100 days • outburst is confined to the envelope ρ ≈ 103 - 104 g/cm3

  10. MECHANISM: Unstable thermonuclear burning of accreted matter on the surface of a white dwarf star t = 214 s t = 234 s ~500 km Convection via 12C abundance 800 km t = 279 s t = 498 s Casanova et al. (2010, 2011)

  11. MECHANISM: Unstable thermonuclear burning of accreted matter on the surface of a white dwarf star FIRST MODELS: Schatzmann 1950, 1951; Cameron 1959; Rose 1968; Starrfield 1971 (the need for CNO enhancement); ... LATER: Parameterized/one-zone models: Hillebrandt and Thielemann 1982; Wiescher et al. 1986; Weiss and Truran 1990; ... 1-D hydrodynamic models: Prialnik and Kovetz 1995; Starrfield et al. 1998; Jose and Hernanz 1998; Paxton et al. 2011 ... Multidimensional models (limited):Shara 1982, Fryxell and Woosley 1982, Shankar et al. 1992, Glasner and Livne 1995, Kercek et al. 1998, Kercek et al. 1999 (3D), Glasner et al. 2005, Glasner et al. 2007, Casanova et al. 2010, Casanova et al. 2011 (3D) NUCLEOSYNTHESIS: MultiD models: limited in scope, networks ≤ 15 isotopes Still need to rely on 1D hydro models for detailed nucleosynthesis calculations KEY variables: MWD, Macc, Zacc, Linitial, mixing

  12. MODELS → for nucleosynthesis − 1D hydrodynamic → reaction networks: ≈ 100 species, H − Ca José, Casanova, Moreno, García-Berro, AP, and Iliadis (2010)

  13. MODELS → for nucleosynthesis − 1D hydrodynamic → reaction networks: ≈ 100 species, H − Ca 13C, 15N, 17O solar José and Hernanz (2007) José, Casanova, Moreno, García-Berro, AP, and Iliadis (2010) How reliable are these nucleosynthesis predictions?

  14. NUCLEAR PHYSICS Nova sensitivity study (Iliadis et al. (2002)): ■ input from 5 different hydrodynamic nova simulations ■ Variation of each of 175 reaction rates within errors

  15. NUCLEAR PHYSICS Nova sensitivity study (Iliadis et al. (2002)): ■ input from 5 different hydrodynamic nova simulations ■ Variation of each of 175 reaction rates within errors Fox+ 2004,2005; Hager+2012, Kontos+2012, LUNA Chafa+2005,2007,2013; Sergi+2013, LUNA Parete-Koon+ 2003, Blacknom+2003, Dufour+2004 Bardayan+ 2001, 2005; de Sereville+ 2003, 2005, 2007; Kozub+ 2005, Chae+ 2006, Beer+2011, Adekola+2011, Mountford+2012, Laird+2013 Davids+2003, Bishop+ 2003, D’Auria+ 2004, Seweryniak+2005, Liu+2007 Hale+ 2002, Jenkins+2013 Rowland+2004, Hale+2004 Visser+2007, Zegers+ 2008, Lotay+ 2008 Ruiz+2006, AP+2011, Pittman+2012 Deibel+ 2008, Lotay+ 2009, 2011 Jenkins+2006, Ma+2007, Wrede+2007, 2009. AP+2011, Dohery+2012, Irvine+2013 AP+ 2009, Freeman+ 2011, Fallis+2013

  16. NUCLEAR PHYSICS How are these thermonuclear rates determined? Reaction rate per particle pair at some temperature T So...."just" measure σ(E) (or estimate it from theory) and solve! For reactions involved in novae, the cross-section is often dominated by a few contributions from narrow resonances

  17. NUCLEAR PHYSICS How are these thermonuclear rates determined? Reaction rate per particle pair at some temperature T So...."just" measure σ(E) (or estimate it from theory) and solve! For reactions involved in novae, the cross-section is often dominated by a few contributions from narrow resonances An isolated resonance can be described by the Breit-Wigner formula

  18. NUCLEAR PHYSICS How are these thermonuclear rates determined? Reaction rate per particle pair at some temperature T So...."just" measure σ(E) (or estimate it from theory) and solve! For reactions involved in novae, the cross-section is often dominated by a few contributions from narrow resonances An isolated resonance can be described by the Breit-Wigner formula

  19. NUCLEAR PHYSICS How are these thermonuclear rates determined? For these cases, the problem may be reduced to determining the parameters of resonances These may be determined through indirect measurements (stable beams/targets, high cross-sections)

  20. NUCLEAR PHYSICS MOST nuclear reaction rates involved in standard models of classical nova explosions are sufficiently well-constrained. Effect of an updated reaction network on nucleosynthesis predictions With data from Starrfield+ (2009) 1D hydro models José and Iliadis (2011)

  21. Direct (recent): Chae+ 2006, de Sereville+ 2009, Murphy+ 2009, Beer+ 2011 Indirect (recent): Dalouzy+ 2009, Adekola+ 2011a, 2011b, 2012, Laird+ 2013 18F(p,α)15O T of interest for novae DIRECT: Beer+ (2011) TRIUMF 5x106 pps 2 counts in 5 days

  22. Direct (recent): Chae+ 2006, de Sereville+ 2009, Murphy+ 2009, Beer+ 2011 Indirect (recent): Dalouzy+ 2009, Adekola+ 2011a, 2011b, 2012, Laird+ 2013 18F(p,α)15O Laird, AP++ (2013) experimental rate varied within uncertainties 1D hydro nova model γ-ray emission from novae may initially be dominated by contributions from e+-e- following 18F(β+) (t1/2 = 110 m)

  23. Indirect (recent): Jenkins+ 2006, Ma+ 2007, Wrede+ 2007, 2009, AP+ 2011, Doherty+ 2012, Irvine+ 2013 30P(p,γ)31S AP++ (2011) experimental rate varied within uncertainties 1D hydro nova model

  24. The unreasonable effectiveness of experiments in constraining nova nucleosynthesis Nucleosynthesis in classical nova explosions and Type I X-ray bursts Anuj Parikh Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Institut d'Estudis Espacials de Catalunya Barcelona, Spain

  25. d = 8.6 ly DA-B = 8 − 30 AU Classical nova explosions Compact object: white dwarf (CO / ONe) Lmax: ~ 104 – 105 Lsol tlightcurve: ~ days – months Torbital: ~ 1 – 16 h trec: ~ 104 – 105 yr Tpeak: ~ 0.1 – 0.4 GK ρpeak: ~ 103– 104 g / cm3 envelope: ~ 100 km #Galaxy: ~ 30 / yr Ejecta: ~ 10-4 – 10-5 Msol / nova Sirius A MS star Sirius B white dwarf HST ≈ 30 000 AU ≈ 0.002" nucleosynthesis: H – Ca Most of the thermonuclear reaction rates involved are constrained by experiments Nova Cygni 1992 (d ~ 10 000 ly) HST (1994)

  26. OBSERVATIONS mass fraction in ejecta José and Hernanz (1998)

More Related